Related provisions for BIPRU 7.8.29
61 - 80 of 187 items.
The purpose of REC 3.16 is to ensure that the FSA receives a copy of the UK recognised body's plans and arrangements for ensuring business continuity if there are major problems with its computer systems. The FSA does not need to be notified of minor revisions to, or updating of, the documents containing a UK recognised body's business continuity plan (for example, changes to contact names or telephone numbers).
Examples of when the FSA may require the suspension of trading of a financial instrument include:(1) if an issuer fails to make a RIS announcement as required by the disclosure rules within the applicable time-limits which the FSA considers could affect the interests of investors or affect the smooth operation of the market; or(2) if there is or there may be a leak of inside information and the issuer is unwilling or unable to issue an appropriate RIS announcement within a reasonable
The extent to which a person can rely on individual guidance given to him will depend on many factors. These could include, for example, the degree of formality of the original query and the guidance given, and whether all relevant information was submitted with the request. Individual guidance is usually given in relation to a set of particular circumstances which exist when the guidance is given. If the circumstances later change, for example, because of a change in the circumstances
The operation of BIPRU 14.2.8 R can be illustrated by an example as follows: where the credit derivative is a first to default transaction, the appropriate percentage for the potential future credit exposure will be determined by the lowest credit quality of the underlying obligations in the basket. If there are non-qualifying items in the basket, the percentage applicable to the non-qualifying reference obligation should be used. For second and subsequent to default transactions,
Table: Example of the reduced net underwriting position calculation
This table belongs to BIPRU 7.8.29G
Time |
Percentage reduction (see BIPRU 7.8.28R) |
||||
At initial commitment 9.00am Monday |
£100m gross amount is reduced by £20m due to sales/sub-underwriting commitments confirmed in writing at the time of initial commitment (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (1)) and (4)). |
= |
£80m |
90% |
£8m |
Post initial commitment 9.02am Monday |
Remaining £80m is reduced by £40m due to further sales, sub-underwriting commitments obtained and allocations granted (see BIPRU 7.8.17R (2) - (5)). |
= |
£40m |
90% |
£4m |
At the end of working day 1 |
Remaining £40m is reduced to £20m due to further sales. |
= |
£20m |
90% |
£2m |
End of working day 3 |
Remaining £20m is reduced to £5m due to further sales. |
= |
£5m |
75% |
£1.25 m |
End of working day 4 |
Remaining £5m is reduced to £2m due to further sales. |
= |
£2m |
50% |
£1m |
End of working day 5 |
Remaining £2m is reduced to £1m due to further sales. |
= |
£1m |
25% |
£0.75 m |
Start of working day 6 |
£1m remaining |
= |
£1m |
0% |
£1m |
The firm is responsible for ensuring delivery of the required report at the FSA's offices by the due date. If a report is received by the FSA after the due date and the firm believes its delivery arrangements were adequate, it may be required to provide proof of those arrangements. Examples of such proof would be:(1) "proof of posting" receipts from a UK post office or overseas equivalent which demonstrates that the report was posted early enough to allow delivery by the due
Examples of reports covering a group are:(1) the compliance reports required from banks under SUP 16.6.4 R;(2) annual controllers reports required under SUP 16.5.4 R;(3) annual close links reports required under SUP 16.5.4 R(4) consolidated financial reports required from banks under SUP 16.7.7 R;(5) consolidated reporting statements required from securities and futures firms under SUP 16.7.24 R.
A conflict of interest arises in a situation where a person with responsibility to act in the interests of one person may be influenced in his action by an interest or association of his own, whether personal or business or employment related. Conflicts of interest can arise both for the employees of UK recognised bodies and for the members (or other persons) who may be involved in the decision-making process, for example where they belong to committees or to the governing body.
The FSA recognises that a UK recognised body has legitimate interests of its own and that its general business policy may properly be influenced by other persons (such as its owners). Such a connection does not necessarily imply the existence of a conflict of interest nor is it necessary to exclude individuals closely connected with other persons (for example, those responsible for the stewardship of the owner's interests) from all decision-making processes in a UK recognised
(1) An example of BIPRU 7.3.10R is as follows. The current market value of a particular equity is £2.50. If a firm contracts to sell this equity in five year's time for £3 it would treat the notional short equityposition as having a value of £2.50 when calculating the equity PRR.(2) In effect, the forward position has been treated as being equivalent to a spot position for the purposes of calculating equity PRR. To capture the risk that the forward price changes relative to the
An example of BIPRU 7.3.16R is as follows. A firm decides to treat a FTSE Eurotop 300 future under the standard equity method, and furthermore, chooses to treat it as one notional position. The table in BIPRU 7.3.16R requires that this notional position be treated as if it were from a separate notional country rather than any of the countries to which the underlying equities are from.
(1) The guidance relevant to delegation within the firm is also relevant to external delegation ('outsourcing'). A firm cannot contract out its regulatory obligations. So, for example, under Principle 3 a firm should take reasonable care to supervise the discharge of outsourced functions by its contractor.(2) A firm should take steps to obtain sufficient information from its contractor to enable it to assess the impact of outsourcing on its systems and controls.
Where it is made possible and appropriate by the nature, scale and complexity of its business, a firm should segregate the duties of individuals and departments in such a way as to reduce opportunities for financial crime or contravention of requirements and standards under the regulatory system. For example, the duties of front-office and back-office staff should be segregated so as to prevent a single individual initiating, processing and controlling transactions.